Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League

Wiki-Code Formatting Adjustments using color data from Module:Gridiron color/data

Is there a way to change the wiki-code formatting for Template:Gridiron alt primary style so that the border color in that specific template uses Template:Gridiron tertiary color raw instead of Template:Gridiron primary color raw? I'd change it myself, but I'm not technically proficient enough to implement this change by myself. Would anyone be opposed to changing the wiki-code formatting here? If not, would someone who knows how please help me implement this change? Also, how would I change the wiki-code formatting for the rowcells in Template:Infobox NFL team back to where they were at a normal size? Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 03:44, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Unless I'm misunderstanding, the whole point of using the alt style is to use the secondary color as the filler and the primary color as the border (which makes it an inverse of the primary style). And the NFL team infobox is now using |rowstyle= instead of |headerstyle= to provide alternating styles, which seems to not work in exactly the same way. Personally I don't think we need every header to be the same size as the title header anyway as it just takes up additional space for no reason, but if others disagree then I can take another look at it. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 16:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@Dissident93: I mean, the only reason why I'm even proposing a wiki-code formatting change for Template:Gridiron alt primary style is because if you look at the wiki-code formatting for the Baltimore Ravens at Module:Gridiron color/data, the Ravens use  gold  as their tertiary team color (i.e., border color), but then that color can't be used in Template:Gridiron alt primary style. I'm just using the Ravens as an example, but my point is that the same tertiary border color should be used for both Template:Gridiron primary style & Template:Gridiron alt primary style for all teams that have a different tertiary color for the borders. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 04:26, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Would implementing your proposed change affect other teams and if so, would the module data have to be fixed for to account for it? ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 14:48, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

@Dissident93: Yes, implementing my proposed change would affect the following NFL teams: the Baltimore Ravens, the Arizona Cardinals, the Indianapolis Colts & the New York Jets. It would also affect the following CFL teams: the Calgary Stampeders & the Saskatchewan Roughriders. All I would like to see is the same tertiary border color for these teams that's used in the |titlestyle= be used in the |basestyle=. Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 22:23, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

@Hey man im josh and Gonzo fan2007: Please explain to me how implementing these changes would affect a wide number of pages and why you both don't see this as an improvement? Charlesaaronthompson (talk) 02:07, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm pretty dense when it comes to all the colors stored: "primary color", "secondary color", "tertiary color raw", "alt primary", "alt secondary". Is there a primer on how we typically use one color setting versus another?—Bagumba (talk) 04:21, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

List of Super Bowl losing quarterbacks

Thoughts on this one? I'm not really seeing this as a topic discussed by third-party, reliable sources. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:35, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Pure trivia and stats cruft. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 21:59, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

This reminds me, I wanted to nominate it for deletion. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

I would support that move Hey man im josh. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

I would support that, too. The losing starting quarterbacks are already listed at List of Super Bowl starting quarterbacks, for that matter. Useight (talk) 02:09, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Alrighty, since there's feedback I'm not off my rocker on this idea, I've sent it to AfD. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:22, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

NFL attendances

Hi, I was asked to discuss about the average attendance figures of the NFL in 2023 over here. Do you think those would be a good addition? 80.57.47.217 (talk) 07:45, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that was me that mentioned it might be worth discussing here. I thought that the numbers might be interesting, but they were sorted simply based on the number of attendees. That's cool, and interesting, but I think it'd be more valuable if we had the percentage included in a column as well, and sorted by that, as opposed to the raw attendance numbers. Also, I noticed your contributions and thought I'd encourage you to register an account. It'd make communication with you easier, as we could ping you, and you'd be able to better see a history of your edits and such. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:49, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

It'd make communication with you easier, as we could ping you ...: Editors could use {{talkback}}, but many might not be aware or find it inconvenient. —Bagumba (talk) 00:45, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Jet Chip Wasp

I just ran across this one. I really can't grasp that this couldn't adequately be covered in Super Bowl LIV. I really don't see too much independent coverage about the play, outside of typical Super Bowl coverage. Currently, the article is maybe 40% about the Super Bowl itself, and about 10% just the broadcast calls of the play. Wanted to get some opinions before I WP:AFD or request a merge. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Stat table templates

I have some stat table templates tailored to position if anybody wishes to use them. Ideally, a template could be used to enforce consistency further if that's desired. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 17:04, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Those look good. I've always wished the stat tables had named parameters like the infoboxes though. It's hard to tell where stuff goes sometimes. The college football head coaching template has named parameters. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 17:15, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Should references be included in NFL infoboxes?

I am wondering if references should be included in NFL infoboxes… I removed a few but I thought I should check here before I do that anymore. Thanks WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 22:26, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Similar to the lead, all information in an infobox should be included in the body of the article, so generally it should be cited there and not in the lead/infobox. That said, controversial items may need to be directly cited even in the lead. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 22:51, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

I was thinking the same thing. There's an editor who added dozens of references to the NFL infoboxes over the months. Never saw that in the NFL boxes before. I left them there and later saw a much more experienced editor thanked this person for their work in general .. far from a warning. That stopped me from asking. Bringingthewood (talk) 00:26, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

If there's a pro-football-reference link in the infobox, and the information is supported by that link, i dont think a reference needs to be added in the infobox. Ideally, the information should be mentioned in the body in prose and cited. —Bagumba (talk) 00:37, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

They're references like the one for Mario Monds. Same editor, all are for the teams in career history. Bringingthewood (talk) 00:48, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bagumba@Bringingthewood@Gonzo fan2007 Alright thanks I will not remove them unless cited in the infobox from PFR. WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 01:53, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, err on the side of verifiability. At some point as the article improves (WP:TIND), the reference can be placed with prose in the body. —Bagumba (talk) 02:08, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Right, also, one last thing, on Giorgio Tavecchio, is it really necessary that every year on the Raiders it shows if he is on the practice squad or the active roster. Just checking, seems a bit complicated to me but I want your imput on that. WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 02:23, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Crash Underride went and simplified it.[1] It did seem a bit lengthy before, but not sure if there's a standard on whether offseason and practice squad stints should be noted or not during multi-year spans with the same team. —Bagumba (talk) 16:17, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Suggested moves, J. R. Reed (American football, born 1982) and J. R. Reed (gridiron football, born 1996)

J. R. Reed (American football, born 1982) → J. R. Reed (American football) and J. R. Reed (gridiron football, born 1996) → J. R. Reed (gridiron football) – J. R. Reed (gridiron football, born 1996) was moved a little over a year ago, and thought I would start a discussion about these as they no longer both have the (American football) anymore. Anyways, thought I would at least bring it up or if others have a different suggestion that would be fine too. WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 18:58, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

I'd leave it. A reader looking for a player in the US by that name might not necessarily know which one happened to play in Canada too. The birth year slightly helps to disambiguate.—Bagumba (talk) 19:18, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Or J. R. Reed (American football, born 1982) → J. R. Reed (safety, born 1982) and J. R. Reed (gridiron football, born 1996) → J. R. Reed (safety, born 1996) – Was another one that I was thinking. WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 00:58, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

WP:NCGRIDIRON #4 says to just use "American football" when using birth year.—Bagumba (talk) 03:32, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Category:Super Bowl winning players

The above category was created recently but Category:Super Bowl champions was already deleted in the past. I personally never minded the champions category though. That CfD looked like it could have used more discussion. I'm not stating an opinion one way or the other, I just thought we should resolve this before someone goes through and adds it to every player. I think a bot could have the categories added back automatically by simply undeleting the champions category? ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 19:50, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

@WikiOriginal-9: That CfD was pretty well attended, resulting in 10 delete votes. The rationale in the CfD still applies from my point of view, and I think, based on that, this is essentially just a modified category title for which that CfD still applies to. I boldly G4 deleted the category based on that. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:09, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

OK thanks. In regards to the CfD, I just meant that the last two !votes were saying that WP:PERFCAT doesn't apply to athletes but like I said, I don't mind either way. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:27, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Formatting

I am trying to get a consensus on this to see what people here in the project think…

For example: On Giorgio Tavecchio an editor put in for each year that if Tavecchio was on the practice squad (with an asterisk) like 2014, 2015 and 2016, 2017 did not have an asterisk as he was on the active roster. It seems a bit complicated and clunky to me but I will leave you guys up to that and to get a consensus. WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 00:22, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

For reference, the two formats on that page have been:

• Oakland Raiders (2014)*, (2015)*, (2016)*, (2017)
• Oakland Raiders (2014–2017)

[2] —Bagumba (talk) 07:20, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Agree that the explicit one looks clunky, while the more compact one misleads that he played four seasons on the main roster, when in reality he was released in the preseason in the first three seasons. I never understood overblowing the infobox tenure with "offseason" stints (does any other project do that?), even if I accept listing practice squads. —Bagumba (talk) 07:42, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• I agree that listing offseason/preseason stints are bad form. We're talking about practice man. What is next adding "one-day contracts"?-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 16:22, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  Yeah. It seems a bit much to me and a bit too complicated. WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 (talk) 19:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  So this seems like one of those perhaps bad practices we'll likely continue for "consistency" and "ease" unless there's ever volunteers to remove the thousands of existing offseason (and likely unsourced) stints. —Bagumba (talk) 02:18, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Packers–Seahawks rivalry at WP:GAN

Would anyone feel like doing me a real solid and reviewing Packers–Seahawks rivalry at WP:GAN in the next week or so? The Packers and Seahawks play each other on December 15, I thought it would be cool to get it to DYK on the day of the game, but obviously need the GAN to make it eligible for DYK. Cookies, barnstars and QPQ would be freely offered! :) « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:32, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Template:American football positions (2024)

My attempt to change (revision) the {{American football positions}} was reverted (diff). I discussed this matter to the editor who reverted the changes. He suggested that I come here, hoping that you guys figure out what to do with the template. Happy Thanksgiving! George Ho (talk) 19:30, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

I don't find the version that George Ho swapped the template to to be better than what was there, but I also recognize what was there wasn't great. I'm hopeful someone here has an idea on a better implementation. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:33, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

I'd redesign it using the standard {{Navbox}}, with high-level groups for offense, defense, and special teams. I don't see any particular significance to the current custom organization–it's not a visual alignment of X's and O's by position. —Bagumba (talk) 19:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

I did just that :) Feel free to tinker and or revert. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:16, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for History of the New York Giants (1994–present)

History of the New York Giants (1994–present) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 01:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Well this would put Wikipedia:Good topics/History of the New York Giants on the path to be a candidate for removal. It's one of our five NFL topics that have been promoted, so hopefully someone interested in good articles and their improvement is up for the task. The only Giants fan that springs to mine for me is @Giants2008. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:59, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Football biography cleanup

We made a lot of progress in 2023 and early 2024 with the article improvement campaign at Wikipedia:WikiProject National Football League/Football biography cleanup, but progress has stalled in recent months. There are still a lot of stubs lacking SIGCOV that could use work. Cbl62 (talk) 03:20, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

2024 Chicago Bears–Detroit Lions Thanksgiving game

I mean, ridiculous game, but long term notability? Thoughts? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 22:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

These are always difficult. Per WP:LASTING:

It may take weeks or months to determine whether or not an event has a lasting effect. This does not, however, mean recent events with unproven lasting effect are automatically non-notable.

Or WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE:

Events that are only covered in sources published during or immediately after an event, without further analysis or discussion, are likely not suitable for an encyclopedia article. However, this may be difficult or impossible to determine shortly after the event occurs, as editors cannot know whether an event will receive further coverage or not. That an event occurred recently does not in itself make it non-notable.

YMMV on how recentism may skew an AfD.—Bagumba (talk) 02:09, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

These are always hard to suss out, but something I will mention without really taking a side is that the game did, more or less, lead directly to Eberflus' firing, which is the first time in da Bears' extensive history that they have made an in-season coaching change. Etzedek24 ^{(I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record)} 19:05, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2024 Chicago Bears–Detroit Lions Thanksgiving game. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:55, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

"Madhouse in Maryland" name

Discussion to garner consensus on a name for the Madhouse in Maryland Hail Mary play a couple of weeks ago on its talk page. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 15:54, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Forbes Field

Forbes Field has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 03:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Using Template:Gridiron alt secondary color

OK. What does everyone prefer to be used in the |above= field of all 32 NFL team templates? Should we use Template:Gridiron alt primary style or should we use Template:Gridiron alt secondary color? Please comment? CharlesEditor23 (talk) 03:48, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Can you share some examples here of the differences so that people can comment without digging and testing to view the differences themselves @CharlesEditor23? Typically that works best when proposing changes. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:42, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

OK. Here's the coding difference for the Cincinnati Bengals:

Mine:

* Based and headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio

Hey man im josh's:

* Based and headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio

Admittedly, it's a slight difference, and I know you'll all say it's indistinguishable, but it makes a difference if we ever decided to add |border=2 to the |basestyle= of NFL team templates. Here's how the template looks with and without the |border=2 wiki-code formatting:

With:

| basestyle = background-color: #FB4F14 !important; color: #000000 !important; box-shadow: inset 2px 2px 0 #000000, inset -2px -2px 0 #000000;; brings this:

 Cincinnati Bengals - primary set (with border)

Without:

| basestyle = background-color: #FB4F14 !important; color: #000000 !important; ; brings this:

 Cincinnati Bengals - primary set (without border)

OK. That said, here's what the visual difference in the wiki-code formatting using Template:Gridiron alt primary style & Template:Gridiron alt secondary color looks like:

Gridiron alt primary style (with border):

 Based and headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio - primary set

Gridiron alt primary style (without border):

 Based and headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio - primary set

Gridiron alt secondary color (with border):

 Based and headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio - primary set

Gridiron alt secondary color (without border):

 Based and headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio - primary set

That's what I was trying to show you all when I was attempting to make my edits. Again, I'm sorry if it came across as me engaging in WP:Editwarring. Also, for the record, Template:Infobox NFL team uses |border=2 as its wiki-code formatting in the infobox as it currently stands. Here's how that looks:

| rowstyle1 = background-color: #ACACAC !important; color: #000000 !important; box-shadow: inset 2px 2px 0 #DCDCDC, inset -2px -2px 0 #DCDCDC;; text-align:center; padding:5px;

I'm just saying that all I want is consistent wiki-code formatting in the infobox & main templates. It does not make sense to me to use |border=2 in the infobox, but not in the |basestyle= of each NFL team template. Either we use |border=2 in both the infobox & main team template, or we don't. That's the WP:CONSENSUS I'm trying to achieve. CharlesEditor23 (talk) 20:46, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

I'll repeat my (unanswered) question from #Wiki-Code Formatting Adjustments using color data from Module:Gridiron color/data above: I'm pretty dense when it comes to all the colors stored: "primary color", "secondary color", "tertiary color raw", "alt primary", "alt secondary". Is there a primer on how we typically use one color setting versus another? —Bagumba (talk) 16:02, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

I don't know. What I was trying to get across was that I wanted to see the Baltimore Ravens' template look like this:

Baltimore Ravens by Module:Gridiron color and Module:Gridiron color/sandbox (this is the wiki-code formatting for the |titlestyle=):

 Baltimore Ravens - primary set

Notice how  purple  is the primary background color,  white  is the secondary text color, and  gold  is the tertiary border color. That's how it is now. This is what it looks like in the |basestyle=:

 Baltimore Ravens - secondary set

Notice how  black  is the predominant color in the |basestyle= (because black is the secondary color for the Ravens) and  white  is the alt secondary color. Also, notice how the |border=2 color changes from  gold  to  purple . All I'm trying to do is unify the |border=2 color for both the |titlestyle= & the |basestyle= that uses its color data from Module:Gridiron color/data & uses Template:Gridiron tertiary color raw. I'm trying to make sure the |border=2 color in the |basestyle= of the Ravens' template specifically uses  gold  (because metallic gold is the Ravens' third team color). I believe the wiki-code formatting should look like this: <div style="background:# black ; color:# white ; border:2px solid; # gold ; in the |basestyle= for the Ravens. CharlesEditor23 (talk) 20:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

CharlesEditor23, can you elaborate on what downstream changes or unintended consequences this would have for other templates using these modules? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure on what downstream changes or unintended consequences there would be. Also, what do you mean by downstream changes? Hopefully there are other editors smarter than me that can help me out? I definitely see your point. These changes probably should not be implemented until we can figure out what downstream changes or unintended consequences there are and how to work around or bypass them completely. CharlesEditor23 (talk)! CharlesEditor23 (talk) 22:57, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

As an example, you may only intended to make changes that impact certain teams, but by implementing this, you end up making changes for other team templates you don't necessarily intend. That would be a downstream change. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 23:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

OK. That's actually helpful. Thank you for that. Now that I think about it, I don't believe there would be any downstream changes or unintended consequences for implementing these changes, though I think further discussion is obviously warranted here. Waiting for Hey man im josh to comment. CharlesEditor23 (talk) 00:08, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

That's the reason I didn't immediately implement your requests a few weeks ago. The thing is pretty convoluted and making formatting changes for individual teams could easily break another's. The intent when I was editing them myself a few weeks ago was to inverse the primary and secondary colors for the alt style, but I guess I either overlooked something or broke it myself. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 00:46, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

I've been here and watching. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:26, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Would the proposed changes be done to specific team templates, or would it be to a generic template used by all teams? —Bagumba (talk) 00:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

That's a very fair and very valid question. In the interest of fairness, I would vote for these changes to be implemented to a generic template used by all teams, but we need more discussion about any downstream changes or unintended consequences first. CharlesEditor23 (talk) 00:45, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Per your earlier response (didn't see it), but Template:Gridiron primary style and Template:Gridiron alt primary style are the only ones we use within templates. The other ones aren't really directly used and both baseball and basketball colors work fine with only five modules (gridiron uses nine), so I don't see why we couldn't simplify them here. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 00:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

@Dissident93 I would 100 percent definitely vote for what you're proposing, because it seems to me like it's the most reasonable and straight forward solution (to only use color data and wiki-code formatting using Template:Gridiron primary style & Template:Gridiron alt primary style). What does everyone else think? CharlesEditor23 (talk) 01:02, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

I can't think of a single case where one of the other templates are directly used, at least anymore. They surely had a use prior to the color module's creation in 2018 and could probably be safely deleted now, but we'd need to ensure nothing would break on account of that. Where's a link to that tool that can check to see where a template is used? ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 01:10, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

I don't know if there is a link to a tool to check to see if a template is used, or where it would be. That I don't know. Would anyone else be opposed to deleting all the other unnecessary templates linked to Module:Gridiron color? CharlesEditor23 (talk) 02:22, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Does entering hastemplate in a search box suffice? —Bagumba (talk) 03:07, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

No better than using the "What links here" tool, but it does look like all of the "raw" templates aren't used anywhere while the other templates have occasional uses. Just to be safe, I've merged the raw templates with their respective templates for now to see if anything is broken before I request deletion. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 17:04, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Are there concerns regarding accessibility? I'm noting that some past discussions did center around this. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:34, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

I believe the majority of them were addressed. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 16:41, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Template:Color contrast ratio says that normal-sized text should have contrast >= 4.5, but teams like the Dolphins (3.95) and Chargers (4.28) are below that at Module:Gridiron color/data. If the alt primary and alt secondary should be used instead, is that swapped at Module:Gridiron color/data or it's the responsibility of the calling templates to swap the colors? —Bagumba (talk) 17:05, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Honestly, my whole thing is that the Miami Dolphins template needs to use  #008E97  as the shade of aqua, because that's the shade the team uses, even if it means that the text color needs to be black for WP:CONTRAST purposes. Likewise, the Los Angeles Chargers template needs to use  #0080C6  as the shade of powder blue, because that's the specific shade that team uses. So if the color codes for the primary team colors for the Dolphins & Chargers need to be changed, then so be it. CharlesEditor23 (talk) 05:33, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

There's no traceability of where these colors come from. At Module:College color, it has citations at least. If we don't use the "official" team colors due to accessibility, how is that tracked so someone later doesn't come along and fix the "wrong" colors? —Bagumba (talk) 05:44, 11 December 2024 (UTC)